Provincial correctional workers in Ontario: Unpacking the mental health and occupational experiences of institutional management and leaders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite growing attention to the diverse mental health challenges within correctional work, minimal research has focused on the experiences of institutional managers and leaders. The current study analyzed survey responses from institutional managers and leaders in Ontario, Canada ( n = 97), focusing on mental health disorder prevalence, stress exposures, and support seeking practices. Results indicated a high prevalence of mental health disorders, with 56.0 % of participants screening positive for at least one mental health disorder, most often Major Depressive Disorder (34.5 %), Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (31.3 %), and Generalized Anxiety Disorder (27.4 %). Approximately one-third of participants reported prior suicidal ideation. Other responses revealed these staff experienced cumulative exposure to operational and organizational stressors, including factors tied to the social context of their work. Yet, many participants reported never accessing formal mental health supports. We ponder how to reduce the disconnect between mental health needs and support seeking practices in the context of supporting correctional management and leadership to evidence a need for efforts toward creating a healthier work and living environment. • Few studies have explored the mental health plight of upper-level correctional staff. • 56 % of participants screened positive for at least one mental health disorder. • Many participants reported prior suicidal ideation. • Few participants reported accessing formal mental health supports. • There is a need for mental health training and interventions for upper-level staff.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".